About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
of the worst relationships i can remember, and i have covered presidents all the way back it ronald reagan. these leaders are not simpatico. they have leaned over backward, and that the republican nominees did too much. the white house comes to this visit clearly with that in mind. >> i want it bring in joe ruben. good to see you. >> great to be here. thanks, craig. >> joe, we heard from andrea, the perception of the president in israel. let's talk about the perception in the palestinian areas as well. talk to me a little bit about that. >> this is the right visit at the right time. the president going to israel right now is consistent with american president's past, about making a trip in the second term. and this is his first trip. and it sends a signal to the palestinians, to israelis, that america is engaged and is serious about seeing a resolution to their conflict. it doesn't mean that united states is going to put forward a plan and force the sides to the table but it is saying, clearly, and the president's been beaten up for this quite a bit, that u.s. is paying attention and tryin
's not certainly the same thing that he believed. and we brought up the spector of ronald reagan and he had three legs to that republican stool back then, the christian he coalition, you have the defense hawks, but you also have the small government libertarians and ronald reagan didn't preach small government because we can't afford it, but big government into the lives of american people is against the founding document. the republicans lost the argument against big government because suddenly we could afford it and look where we are now. >> megyn: it doesn't seem that rand paul is on different footing when it comes to small government. he's on different footing when it comes to foreign affairs and our military intervention. >> well, both of those positions are rooted in a constitutional argument. you can make nuanced arguments when it comes to the drone strike, you're getting lost if you thought the filibuster for 12 hours was about drones. rather seeing a republican senator stand up against the executive branch and he did something that the brilliant minds of the republican caucus had not bee
of each other to vote for ronald reagan because he crafted a beautiful economic message that showed that capitolism was for everybody. we're not doing that. we need an economic message that does those things. the republicans can't -- people will say, well the democrats start out with 230 electoral votes, why don't you become a pro-choice party or pro-gay marriage, and there are people who think about these things strategically. you lose the base. we can't afford to lose the southern base. >> michael: jack, that's like saying in the 50s well you're a preschool integration party, well, we don't want to do that because we'll lose our base. there has to be a point where you go along with the country? >> yes, and no. the 50s -- the electoral map was very different in the 50s. the republicans today are very dependent on a southern base. in the 50s the map was much more torn up. now you have regional parties competing. what you have are two parties that play exclusively in certain regions. the republicans are dependent on a base so it's much harder to do that now than in
of ronald reagan and stop conservatism and just go back to the good old truth that is worked back then, that reagan laid for the incredible ground work of the economy in the 1980's and 1990's. clinton helped to some extent, ut then he created and repealed glass-steagall, and everybody blames it on george bush. the conservatives who didn't do much for the letter peace, we tried to expand under karl rove, the voting process, and giving more to hispanic community, and we didn't get one increase in vote in that eight-year period so. what makes you think that we're going to give amnesty and all the set get a bunch of votes? it's fraud, and it's another really ploy by the democratic party to keep promising and benefits to everybody who will vote for them no matter what. scommoip we're going to talk about immigration in our next segment of the "washington journal" today. but we still have about five minutes left in this segment, if you want to call in to give us your take on this growth and opportunities report that was released today, or if you think hanges in the republican debates would ha
bush or ronald reagan, correct me colonel north, if i'm wrong, you worked for president reagan, i can't see a president doing nothing time and time again and the only people he seems to be nice to are radicals like mohammed morsi? >> and the united nations. what we've done, we've gone to the united nations well so many time, and what he's done is allowed himself and believe that the united nations was going to stop the north koreans, inter-continental ballistic missiles. they've done it and unless we say carefully, if you have a business that's doing business with either of these two countries, you cannot do business with the united states. >> sean: colonel north, let me ask you this, do you think the world by these acts of aggression, and that's how i view them. do you think they perceive barack obama as weak? >> what they're hoping for is american leadership from the front and they're not getting it today. >> nobody thinks america is weak and anybody who does needs to look at what we did in afghanistan. we put men on the ground, we put our money behind it and we've accomplished our
or ronald reagan, can i see a president doing nothing time and time again and the only people he seems to be nice to are radicals like mohammed morsi. >> we've got gon to the oouts united nations. some times oh, good grieve. he's aloud himself and hope the united nations is going to somehow stop or north koreans. they've done it. iranians will do it, too. and this is unless they impose kinds of sanctions if have you a business doing business with these countries dmoukt business in the united states. >> do you think the world by these acts after gregs is how i view them, do you they they perceive barack obama as weak? >> they're hoping for leadership from the front. they're not getting it today. >> nobody thinks america is weak. anyone who does needs to look at what we did. we have put men on the ground. and accomplished our mission. it's time for the american foam say enough of the war. >> i see him as weak. i think the president is weak. that is a shame. because do you know what? america needs to be strong. if we don't fill the void and step up and lead from the front then i shoulder
and this is something that ronald reagan said in practice, which means my 80% sfrend not my 20% enemy. the principles are sound. is this not a question of how do we change the party or the principles. what it is, it's saying we as a party, if we want to grow and we want to win and govern again, at the presidential level, we've got to look at times and said, hey, you may not agree eye us on every single issue that the party has put out there, but we're willing to include you in the party as long as you understand. >> doesn't this conflict with some of the messaging we've heard from cpac over the weekend, though? >> there are personal some speakers at cpac who don't believe otherwise. i would argue while cpac does represent a good amount of people that believe in the republican party. cpac is not the republican party and the republican party is not cpac. so i appreciate all the work they do out there. but that's one part of the party. i's a great part of the party. but, you know, we're not synonymous. >> and as the first word of the report says, the gop is a tale of two parties. we'll see how that goes
for ronald reagan and for george h.w. bush. so he's really -- he started out as a political consultant. he's certainly a republican. he's certainly a conservative. that's reflected in fox news. i did a quiz with him that a professor at ucla had cooked up to measure conservativism versus liberalism. and he took it and so did i, by the way. and it turns out that he is more conservative than the network. and he agreed that that's probably true. >> so he's obviously very conservative in that position that he has, it filters down, i assume, on the network. i want to play a clip. this is sarah palin. she used to be a fox news contributor until the last election. this is what she said at the conservative political action conference that took place in washington this past weekend. >> if these experts who keep losing elections, yet keep getting rehired, raking in millions, if they feel that strongly about who gets to run in the party, then show should buck up or stay in the truck. buck up and run. the architect can head on back to -- [ cheers ] -- they can head on back to the great lone star state
egregious obvious example of that but even ronald reagan had to raise taxes seven times due to the fact that their other policies were shrinking the middle class. now when i say their economic policies are unsuccessful, that's because from my point of view, i want a healthy, thriving middle class. the progressive side of things liberals in this country, while we certainly care for the poor, we don't do it at the exclusion of the middle class our the exclusion of millionaires. but the middle class has been squeezed so horribly by the -- the -- you know, the promise of trickle-down economics and the chicago school of economics it just -- i mean from -- something as -- the heavy side of it and the shock doctrine, to the crap idea that somehow if you just let the job makers not pay taxes they will hide all of their money in vegas rather than the cayman islands and we'll all live off of the interest it's absurd nonsense that it's the bootstrapers and that anybody who finds themselves with cancer is just lazy ultimately in some way. it's their fault for having a crap
to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform --here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. for four years we have had a president was not willing to take that kind of leadership to make congress work. i hope he will this term. >> i would say this is not the season -- compromise is not in the air. but i think that the republicans in the house realize it is in their political interest to turn the heat down and not have a food fight every few weeks for the american public. what i think is in the air and is happening is people from the far left and the far right are starting to come together against institutions and the governing parties, and you will see more of that. you saw it last week with the drones. you will see it with the banks on wall street. byinesses that are impacted the federal government in terms of getting money. there is increasingly from the left and right a coming together against the
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10